[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Charset policy - Post Munich
[I'm copying this mail to the unicode list. If any Unicoder responds,
please copy your response to (ietf-charsets@innosoft.com).]
A couple of minor comments:
> (Note: ISO 10646 calls the UTF-8 CES a "Transfer Format" rather
> than a "character encoding scheme", but it fits the charset report
> definition of a character encoding scheme).
As I'm on the road (actually at the Eleventh International Unicode
Conference), I don't have access to the ISO 10646 amendments. I think
that ISO 10646 calls UTF-8 a "Transformation Format", not a "Transfer
Format". Can anyone check this? RFC 2130 contains many incorrect
definitions including those of ASCII (!) and of UTF; please let's not
add to them.
> Note also that a language is distinct from a POSIX locale; a POSIX
> locale identifies a set of cultural conventions, which may imply a
> language (the POSIX or "C" locale of course do not), while a
> language tag as described in RFC 1766 identifies only a language.
Would it be helpful to add quotes round the instance of POSIX inside the
brackets? The third line of the above para would become:
language (the "POSIX" or "C" locale of course do not), while a
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Misha Wolf Email: misha.wolf@reuters.com 85 Fleet Street
Standards Manager Voice: +44 171 542 6722 London EC4P 4AJ
Reuters Limited Fax : +44 171 542 8314 UK
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eleventh International Unicode Conference, Sep 2-5 1997, www.unicode.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender,
except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of
Reuters Ltd.